Colonial Playbook Reloaded: The West’s New War in the Horn

The Handlers Return: Old Empires in New Suits

Across the Red Sea corridor, the drums of the handlers are beating again. Ethiopia’s new rhetoric toward Eritrea’s ports isn’t emerging from Addis Ababa’s own imagination — it’s being whispered into existence by those who have long viewed the Horn of Africa not as a home for

Africans, but as a strategic launchpad for empire. For centuries, the West has crafted its power on African soil through a revolving door of methods — colonialism, “aid,” sanctions, and militarized diplomacy. And yet, every time Africans begin to steer toward self-determination, the same hands reappear, repackaging domination as “development.” Today’s push for “access” to the Red Sea is a remix of yesterday’s colonial logic. In the 19th century, Britain

and France raced for the Suez and the Gulf of Aden to choke global trade routes. In the 21st century, Washington and Brussels replay the same score under new instruments — “security cooperation,” “maritime access,” and “regional stability.” But the motives remain unchanged:

control the ports, control the pipelines, control the power. Ethiopia’s growing pressure over Eritrean ports — Assab and Massawa — comes at a time when Western hegemony is visibly crumbling. What many forget, however, is that Eritrea has already offered Ethiopia access to these ports in good faith — access for trade, for shipping, and for cooperation. What was never on the table, and never will be, is ownership. So one must ask: if access was available, and even offered at rates far lower than those charged by Djibouti or Kenya, then what exactly is fueling this sudden war drum? The answer lies beyond Addis Ababa — in the boardrooms and backchannels of the very powers that benefit when African unity turns to division. The handlers return, beating colonial drums once more — using African mouths to sing European songs.

Patterns of Plunder: The Colonial Blueprint Recycled

Africa’s story is full of examples where Western intervention promised order but delivered chaos. Each time, the colonizer left the land bleeding and the treasury empty. Congo (1885 – Today): The Belgian king Leopold II called it a “civilizing mission.” What followed was one of history’s most brutal exploitations: millions killed, rubber and ivory stolen, rivers of blood traded for European wealth. After independence, Congo’s first democratically elected leader, Patrice Lumumba, was assassinated with the direct complicity of Western intelligence. The mineral wealth — cobalt, coltan, copper — remains controlled by multinational firms whose profits never touch Congolese hands. Libya (2011): In 2011, NATO launched “Operation Odyssey Dawn,” claiming to protect civilians. Within months, Libya was turned from Africa’s

most prosperous nation into a fragmented battlefield. The West toppled Muammar Gaddafi, but left behind slavery markets, militias, and chaos. The country that once led the call for African unity was reduced to a proxy zone where European powers and mercenaries carve out oil fields like modern-day crusaders. Mali & the Sahel: Under the guise of fighting terrorism, France entrenched troops in Mali for nearly a decade. When African nations demanded sovereignty, Paris withdrew — leaving behind broken institutions, arms proliferation, and economic dependency. The vacuum bred more instability, exactly what keeps French companies embedded in the region’s uranium and gold industries. Sudan & South Sudan: Western mediation divided Sudan into two, promising peace and prosperity. Instead, both nations were left with internal wars, foreign-owned oil blocks, and IMF-debt traps. Each partition carved new corridors for extraction, ensuring the real victors were not Sudanese, but those financing its fragmentation.

The Red Sea, The Future, and Africa’s Choice

Now, the West’s gaze has shifted once again — to the Horn of Africa. Why? Because the Red Sea has become the last great frontier of global trade control. Whoever commands its ports, commands the arteries of East-West commerce. Eritrea stands as a symbol of uncolonized

defiance, one of the few African nations that refused to bend its knee to foreign bases or World Bank conditionalities. That independence, both political and spiritual, makes it a target. And here lies the hypocrisy: Eritrea never denied Ethiopia access to the sea. What Eritrea denied — and rightfully so — was the transfer of sovereignty over its own ports. Ethiopia

already has arrangements with Djibouti and Kenya. So the question remains: If port access is not the real issue, why beat the war drums at your fellow Africans who charge you less, treat you fairly, and share your history? The answer is uncomfortable: because peace doesn’t profit the handlers. The more chaos, the easier it is to recolonize through “aid,” to control through

“debt,” and to manipulate through “security partnerships.” The same colonial playbook is being reloaded: Weaponize regional rivalries. Fabricate crises of access and security. Fund both sides under the banner of “peacekeeping.” Leave Africa fighting Africa while Western ships dock peacefully in African ports. But this time, the script is unraveling. Africans are watching. Nations like Eritrea, Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso are refusing to play extras in a Western tragedy. The old empire may still control the media and the money, but not the mind

of the new African generation — a generation that understands sovereignty not as a slogan, but as a birthright. As the handlers beat their drums, Africa must answer with rhythm of its own: Unity. Memory. Resistance. The colonial playbook is reloaded — but the people of Africa

are finally learning to read it before it’s played.